And so let the blood letting begin

[curious]

17 minutes ago, Hesi said:

It belongs to the AJC, who are part of the racing industry

Yes, but their object is to conduct race meetings, not fund others to do so. They can't do that without a licence unless as Porky suggests they can get an equalisator licence to do that in their own community.

[Hesi]

Okay then, going back to the bakery

It's in Remuera, it's got pretty run down, ovens need refurbishment, it turns over maybe a quarter of a million in sales each year, and sits on land worth 10 million

It's a nice lifestyle for the owner, nice clientele, but turnover is not high enough to pay for needed maintenance, and the rates have gone through the roof, which is also leaking, they will possibly lose their licence because of food safety concerns

The bank aren't interested, as while plenty of security in value of the assets, the income doesn't stack up

Why not sell and invest in another bakery, in a not so expensive area, thus freeing up a substantial amount of capital, to invest in growing and modernising the new business

Maybe not the beat analogy, but you get the idea

 

 

[Porky]

Hope the racing woes can be sorted, and you make the best decision re-Bakery Hesi.

Never had to face such decisions ! , at least you have a big Capital Asset mate, to fall back on, if that"s what you decide !

[curious]

5 hours ago, barryb said:

Depends on how much a pie costs

True. That's what the TAB would do just put there prices up and make more different varieties of pies. That should solve the problem and then you'll have enough $s to fix the roof and replace the ovens.

 

[curious]

5 hours ago, Hesi said:

Okay then, going back to the bakery

It's in Remuera, it's got pretty run down, ovens need refurbishment, it turns over maybe a quarter of a million in sales each year, and sits on land worth 10 million

It's a nice lifestyle for the owner, nice clientele, but turnover is not high enough to pay for needed maintenance, and the rates have gone through the roof, which is also leaking, they will possibly lose their licence because of food safety concerns

The bank aren't interested, as while plenty of security in value of the assets, the income doesn't stack up

Why not sell and invest in another bakery, in a not so expensive area, thus freeing up a substantial amount of capital, to invest in growing and modernising the new business

Maybe not the beat analogy, but you get the idea

 

 

Seems like all the gains have come from the property and you want to sell that and re-invest in a struggling business?

[Hesi]

10 hours ago, barryb said:

Depends on how much a pie costs

Used to do a lot of work in Remuera, and always went to the Meadowbank bakery

They were expensive, but had the best quality food around, their lemon tarts, were to die for.

Then a new owner took over, and they started making changes, the lemon tarts became very ordinary, the range of rolls and sandwiches got reduced from about 20 down to about 5, and were also pretty ordinary.

They kept the price the same though on everything

Never been back since

[Porky]

I used to drive a couple of km for lunch to Woolworths. YUM....Do ya do the good ole Custard Square?...Mocked Cream Doughnut, Banana Cake, Lamination (red and black), Lolly cake ? flakey pastry sausage roll, , full,hot ,flakey range of pies? Seafood,Steak.Steak and Kidney,Mince ,mince & Cheese..(price was irrelevant)

if ya don,t !...PROBLEM SORTED. ...once the 2 meter rule goes and back to level 1,,,shop will be packed

Take new sales figures to bank ...order new ovens

 

[Hesi]

Racing Board ignored Deloitte’s warning about significant risks with new betting platform

By Barry Lichter • 20 May 2020

The New Zealand Racing Board ignored a warning by a leading international financial consultant that spending tens of millions of dollars on its new fixed odds betting platform involved significant risk.

And today, the racing industry is paying the price, $45 million in debt and still afloat only because of a $72.5 million Government bailout.

New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing was concerned enough about the board’s plans that it commissioned an investigation by Deloitte, which was completed in May, 2017 but was not made public until 10 months later.

In it, Deloitte said that while the board’s initiatives of a new fixed odds platform and an upgraded HD broadcasting network had merit they required investment of between $59 million and $72 million, a significant spend given the board’s poor balance sheet.

It stressed success was “critically dependent” on those two strategies being executed on time and on budget and delivering the benefits anticipated.

Deloitte believed there was “significant risk” with both projects and the board’s calculations relied on significant additional profit being generated within a relatively short period of time.

CEO John Allen announced in May, 2017 that the betting platform would cost between $30 million and $35 million. The price tag ended up at $40.8 million.

But not only did the platform go well over budget it was also five months late.

Betting plummeted when the new bug-ridden website went live in January, 2019.And worse, there were so many bugs in the system when the new website went live in January, 2019, turnover plummeted as frustrated punters either stopped betting or dramatically reduced their spend. Costs escalated even further as the TAB mounted a rearguard action to try to make the platform work.

In its first six months of operation profit was significantly below budget, impacted also by the failure of anticipated legislative changes going through Parliament to enable offshore charges (a betting information use charge and point of consumption charge).

In his Statement of Intent in October 2019, Racing Industry Transition Agency chair Dean McKenzie described the $9.2 million drop in profit in 2018-19 as “very disappointing.” The final profit figure of $136.7 million was $36.8 million below budget.

“While we are optimistic these investments will deliver significant benefits over time, it is clear they have not yet delivered the financial results anticipated.”

McKenzie noted one of the problems of setting the new season budget was a risk of delays in “resolving the backlog of issues with the new betting platform.”

Two most critical issues ignored

Deloitte said the board initiatives did not address the two most critical issues faced by the industry - its lack of scale and cost inefficiency. In essence New Zealand’s population was too small to realise the benefits needed.

“The lack of scale means it is unlikely NZRB will be able to achieve a sustainable competitive advantage against international wagering competitors.

“Our analysis shows NZRB has struggled to contain fixed and variable costs and, as a consequence, revenue growth has not translated into an enhanced bottom line.”

Further, the cost structure of NZRB was high relative to its peers, the report said. This was not a reflection on NZRB management but simply a function of a lack of scale.

Deloitte’s analysis also concluded the success of the board’s initiatives was dependent on very significant changes in both the number of people betting, how they bet and how much.

It questioned whether enough allowance had been made on the impact of more fixed odds betting on tote betting and the increased margin pressure.

The margins the platform would return to the industry were tested by KPMG in an earlier report to the board, but Deloitte was critical of the strength of that testing.

Deloitte developed its own model to estimate the impact of an ongoing decline in tote turnover and increases in operating costs. It did not even make allowance for the substantial costs the board was facing for anti-money laundering compliance (it ended up spending $8 million).

It predicted the financial result would be between $49 million and $135 million lower between 2018 and 2021 than the board assumed - while significantly increasing indebtedness.

Deloitte said it calculated the industry could achieve gross annual benefits of $63 million through outsourcing.

Board chair Glenda Hughes and her CEO John Allen were both very critical of the Deloitte report.

‘Desktop exercise’

In a reply to a letter from the then NZTR board chairman Dr Alan Jackson, NZRB chair Glenda Hughes described the Deloitte report as “a desktop exercise which did not engage with NZRB or draw on the most up to date data.” That meant it could only ever be “illustrative or indicative.”

“Many of Deloitte’s assumptions vary significantly from NZRB’s.”

Hughes pointed to the KPMG report which concluded the assumptions on which its fixed odds betting business case was built were conservative.

Hughes also took issue with Deloitte’s reservations on punter numbers and activity.

“NZRB has demonstrated a strong capacity to acquire new customers and very deliberately manages the positioning of its tote and fixed odds products.”

On outsourcing, Hughes said various reports made it clear there was potential value in it longer term.

“The board accepts this but there are significant risks, including loss of control, which will require careful management.”

Allen was also very critical of the Deloitte report, and said it did not do enough research into the fixed-odds platform.

“In our view they have significantly understated the value we are going to create from this,” he said at the time.

So confident was Allen and the board that the initiatives would immediately boost profits, they decided to increase by $24 million the payout they would make to the racing industry over the next two years.

Neither Hughes not Allen survived on the board to see the disastrous outcome.

[Globederby19]

12 minutes ago, Hesi said:

Neither Hughes not Allen survived on the board to see the disastrous outcome.

Why arent these people held to account, literally. Why is it that our politicians commit the same fiscal mistakes ,yet years later come up smelling like roses, promoted to boards and committees and without batting an eyelid give us advice on how we should operate.Giving Roger Douglass a knighthood FFs. I personally would have shot the prick.

New Zealanders are far to passive in dealing with what I call "normative incompetence".aka Hughes and Allen

[mardigras]

46 minutes ago, Hesi said:

 

“In our view they have significantly understated the value we are going to create from this,” he said at the time.

He clearly lacked understanding of betting markets. Whoever modelled the outcomes he was working to probably enjoyed bananas and the more bananas, the better the outcome.

[craigos1]

1 hour ago, Globederby19 said:

Why arent these people held to account, literally. Why is it that our politicians commit the same fiscal mistakes ,yet years later come up smelling like roses, promoted to boards and committees and without batting an eyelid give us advice on how we should operate.Giving Roger Douglass a knighthood FFs. I personally would have shot the prick.

New Zealanders are far to passive in dealing with what I call "normative incompetence".aka Hughes and Allen

Many years ago at a meeting of Dunedin Branch of The Young Labour Party at The Bill Fraser Lounge we had an important vote.

David Lange or Roger Douglas

Think the vote was 17-1 to Roger Douglas

i was the 1!

[Hesi]

Paul Moroney's approach on Facebook

Paul Moroney Seems to me that those in charge at Avondale are doing everything possible not to support the racing industry and the new initiatives so desperately needed. My great grandfather provided a loan to help buy the current Matamata racing club land. If it was one of the tracks considered surplus, I would support its sale and that the subsequent proceeds went back into the industry to allow it the chance to firstly survive then hopefully grow again. But we all need to be on the same page.

[mardigras]

7 minutes ago, Hesi said:

Paul Moroney's approach on Facebook

Paul Moroney Seems to me that those in charge at Avondale are doing everything possible not to support the racing industry and the new initiatives so desperately needed. My great grandfather provided a loan to help buy the current Matamata racing club land. If it was one of the tracks considered surplus, I would support its sale and that the subsequent proceeds went back into the industry to allow it the chance to firstly survive then hopefully grow again. But we all need to be on the same page.

That's his opinion. I disagree. Each to their own. I certainly wouldn't want him advising me in business if that is how he comes to his conclusions.

[curious]

23 minutes ago, mardigras said:

That's his opinion. I disagree. Each to their own. I certainly wouldn't want him advising me in business if that is how he comes to his conclusions.

Maybe Paul should encourage Matamata to sell up and support the racing industry with the new initiatives that he thinks are so desparately needed, whatever those are.

[pete]

The Moroney clan are very long on self interest.

Sister Sue was one of the worst examples of an MP we've had for quite some time and there have been some formidable contenders for the title.

[curious]

9 hours ago, craigos1 said:

Many years ago at a meeting of Dunedin Branch of The Young Labour Party at The Bill Fraser Lounge we had an important vote.

David Lange or Roger Douglas

Think the vote was 17-1 to Roger Douglas

i was the 1!

Hope you've sorted yourself out since then and seen sense.

[craigos1]

Craigs Favourite music Video's

 

FRIDAY   22nd May

LET'S PUT UP OUR FAVOURITE SONGS THAT WE DON'T HAVE IN OUR COLLECTION AT HOME!!

ie: All those song you love but you don't have on 45,LP,Casette,CD or DVD.

All genre's allowed!

 

Lets have a bit of fun!!

[Freda]

You're standing on Maxi's toes...he's the DJ.

[Hesi]

Captain Ken: We have to protect our industry now and hit the overseas bookies for a six

By Barry Lichter • 21 May 2020

One time head sports bookie Ken Rutherford never thought he’d see the day when he’d be advocating banning Kiwi punters from betting overseas.

But the former test cricket captain is used to going on a front foot attack and says the industry is in such a precarious state he believes it has no option.

Rutherford, who captained New Zealand in 18 tests and 38 one-day internationals, has more than a dozen years experience in wagering, first with the New Zealand TAB, where he became head of sports betting in 2004, and then five years in a similar role in Singapore.

So when he says the industry now has to “gang up” on the corporate bookies overseas, it’s with more experience than some of the people who have been running the TAB into the ground in recent years.

Ken Rutherford … former New Zealand test cricket captain.“If you’d asked me two years ago whether I would be in favour of stopping people from having overseas accounts I’d have disagreed strongly. I would have said we had to stand on our own two feet and compete.

“But things have got so bad we need to make sure we are now supporting the New Zealand industry.”

A $2.5 million slice of the Government’s $72.5 million bailout package announced last week has been set aside for the Department Of Internal Affairs to fast-track work on online gambling, including considering measures to mitigate the loss of millions through more and more New Zealanders gambling through offshore platforms.

Rutherford says he knows the idea of blocking the IP addresses of overseas operators will go down poorly with many people who will see limiting or denying competition as a retrograde step. He himself closed his New Zealand TAB account some time ago because of poor service.

“But I think punters need to take some short term pain for long term gain. And if we can get the industry back on track maybe any restriction could be eased.

“I just see our market shrinking so much. The new website didn’t function half as well as the old one and was so poor it drove away truckloads of punters, particularly the bigger ones.

“The TAB’s position is totally untenable unless we can stop so many punters betting offshore - the size of the internal market is not sufficient to allow a large portion of that market to wager offshore.”

Rutherford believes a lot of people simply don’t understand the way the industry is funded, and that overseas bookies contribute nothing to the local industry.

Rutherford spent five years in South Africa working in the equivalent of Trackside and marketing, advancing to CEO in 2012, and says the TAB there is collapsing because of a lack of contribution from bookies and support from Government .

“There needs to be a decent PR campaign to educate people that we need to be supporting our industry here – otherwise there won’t be an industry.

“Of course the onus will be on the TAB to up their game.”

Punters were more knowledgeable than 10 years ago and wouldn’t put up with poor service, worse odds and a lack of information.

Rutherford said he could never understand why a succession of TAB chiefs placed such an emphasis on promoting fixed odds betting when the product at best realised half of the 16.5% of tote betting income.

John Allen … wanted a Lamborghini betting engine.Allen naive about wagering

And he believes former CEO John Allen, under whose watch the disastrous fixed odds betting platform was born, was quite naive about wagering.

Rutherford, in his former role as Waikato Racing Club chief executive, attended a number of the road shows Allen put on when he promoted the need to spend lavish amounts on a Lamborghini engine to drive betting.

“He told everyone we could afford it, because it would generate all this extra money.”

Rutherford says he questioned Allen several times about where the extra growth was going to come from and pointed out that in his experience few punters would bet on the “frilly stuff” he was so desperate to provide.

“He was claiming if you gave punters 100 options on one rugby game you’d grow turnover exponentially.

“But, from the time I started bookmaking, the core options like head-to-head, points start, winning margin and first try always accounted for 85% to 90% of your turnover on a game. That will never change. The TAB was dreaming. Allen was delusional and just didn’t understand the business.”

Anecdotally, says Rutherford, many bookies would actually tell you turnover decreased with too many betting options per match. Too much choice confused punters.

Once integrated, the TAB would then have spent truckloads in marketing the new products for little net reward.

Rutherford says the growth figures spouted by successive CEOs (Andrew Brown, Chris Bayliss and Allen) were pure spin.

“They always talked about how well turnover was going at major sporting events, with no mention of the most important stat - net revenue.

A now familiar email from the TAB to thousands of punters.“And someone at the TAB has to tell us about the cost of the bonus bets that are handed out? Do these essentially promotional items get bundled up into total turnover figures (thus fudging the numbers).”

When Rutherford first started at the TAB in 2001, setting odds on cricket, racing and football, he said it was a traditional Kiwi outfit, run by passionate people in it more for love of the game than money.

But gradually he detected a change and by the time he left in 2006 when Graeme Hansen was CEO it had become a “corporate monolithic bureaucracy.”

“All the CEOs seem to have done since is added layer upon layer of bureaucracy and management.

“I challenge the current crop to roll up their sleeves, get their hands dirty and prepare to fight.”

The synthetic track at Pakenham where remedial work was done last year to reduce kickback.Synthetic tracks a mistake?

Rutherford says with $26 million of the Government’s $50 million emergency package gone already on RITA’s outstanding bills, there isn’t a lot left to boost racing so he questions another $20 million being ring fenced to build two more synthetic tracks at Awapuni and Riccarton.

“Surely if you’re on a tight budget the money should be spent on strategies to grow the business. I can’t see two more polytracks doing that.

“I know by saying that I will get offside with trainers - and I get that they need good surfaces for their horses - but we won’t get all that money back.”

The tracks would also be a real burden for the clubs which will have to raise another $6 million each to build them and later more money to maintain them.

“If you’re so keen to shore up the infrastructure wouldn’t you be far better off getting your top six to eight tracks in the country spot on - like Ellerslie, Te Rapa, Awapuni, Hastings and Riccarton - so they can cope with the increased activity they’ll face with the closure of all these other tracks?”

Rutherford, now the CEO at the Hawkesbury Racing Club in New South Wales, says its synthetic track is used only for training and not racing and only Canberra combines the roles.

“They’re not a good wagering product - Pakenham in Victoria doesn’t do a lot of turnover - and many trainers don’t want to run their horses on them.

“I hope I’m wrong and in five years people are saying thank goodness we had these all weather tracks.”

Preserve media coverage

Rutherford says he believes the industry would benefit far more if say even $5 million was put into preserving, and improving, the media coverage of racing.

It was a monumental mistake for the industry to shut its window to the public.

“It’s mind boggling how quickly they’ve wound back their services. The cost to the industry will be far greater than the savings they’re making.

“I can’t fathom how they’ve cut back so much on the TV component and it makes no sense having no more radio.”

TV preview shows in Australia like ‘Get On’ were paid for by the TAB which recognised their value in driving betting.

And having experts like Grant Nisbett on half an hour before a rugby match, absolutely generated more interest.

As a punter who always had a Best Bets hanging out his back pocket and remembers the 8am scratching service on radio, Rutherford says form guides and racing in the newspapers are a complete must if you don’t want betting to drop.

“These decisions are being made by people who just don’t get it, all they’re doing is slashing and burning for the bottom line and blaming it all on COVID when we all know they were in trouble long before that.

“I don’t want to come across like a know-it-all but it’s absolute rubbish to say it’s a generational thing and only older punters want hard copies of form. It’s part of racing.

“I know how many racebooks we sell at Hawkesbury and it’s all to young guys. You don’t see everyone walking around with a phone in their hands, swiping the screen.

“It’s a death knell if you don’t do all you can to keep wagering going.”

[Hesi]

Yes, that did occur to me when I read his diatribe.

Good on him for speaking out, with such strong opinions, and he is on the mark with many of his comments.

NZ racing has started to sound like the Warriors though, leave and you go on to bigger and better things.

Some of these people in key positions within racing, should have spoken out much sooner than what they have

Barry Lichter doing good work, but only very outspoken of late

John Street, one of the biggest operators in the country, has only just spoken out recently

Ken Rutherford, quiet as a church mouse on issues

David Ellis, have yet to see a published word about his concerns about the state of the industry

Gary Chittick voiced concerns on his website, but very diplomatically

Brian de Lore, the only one, going back, who has been vocal, using The Optimist to express his well informed views

There has been talk in the industry over the past few years, about strikes and votes of no confidence, none of which could have been done, so it was up to industry leaders to take it to the NZRB, about the lack of accountability, for the way things were run and decisions made.

Too late now, to be climbing on the bandwagon

 

 

 

[Midnight Caller]

He has made some valid points,but nothing that hasn't been bantered around before. Jmo, but the circling of  the wagons against other bookies just doesn't  make sense. They could only achieve  this if they are supplying a top product and service🤔. Also they would have to set and trade their market at least  1 point above their competitors to be competitive and corner the NZ market🤔

[mardigras]

The whole idea of blocking off-shore providers, if that is what they are thinking, would be just another typical knee-jerk reaction brought about due to their own incompetencies. 

Lots of places to block, aussie sites, UK sites, Asian sites, sites all over the place. Who's going to be responsible for keeping the ISPs up to date? Who's going to find out who they all are?

[curious]

From 20 years ago ....

An overview of the TAB's history, however, suggests it has been more reactive to social changes than anticipating them.

Admittedly it was often hamstrung by a conservative society and the reluctance of politicians to challenge it. To survive, the TAB has been forced to adapt and reinvent itself. It opened a website for internet punters three years ago and that has become its fastest-growing endeavour.

But this is a fraught area.

In mid-1998 the US senate voted to criminalise gambling on the internet overseas, and a year ago the Australians started looking at ways to control it.

This high-wired world also works to its own rules. The English site flutter.com, launched last year, allows punters to bet directly among themselves.

Although the site has a tabloid feel - bet whether Posh and Becks will announce before June 15, 2001, that they are expecting their second child - the time cannot be far off when punters will use the net to cut out betting agencies.

That's another challenge for the TAB - as is the plight of small and middle-sized racing clubs which are feeling the economic pinch.

Whatever happens next, the TAB and our attitudes to it remain an idiosyncratic microcosm of our country - from angry men in hats to the silently busy world of the microchip.

* Two Over Three on Goodtime Sugar: The New Zealand TAB turns 50, by David Grant. Victoria University Press, $49.95.

[curious]

6 hours ago, barryb said:

Remind me of his achievements at Te Rapa? Just for reference I have listed them below.

 

 

You missed one. He added a sandhill to the track.

[Hesi]

The history tells a story but nothing changes

by Brian de Lore
Published 22 May 2020

Politics, self-interest, hidden agendas, lies, charlatans, nepotism, egotism, creative accounting, jealousies, incompetence, lack of vision, hatred, arrogance, foolishness, self-indulgence and ignorance – traits that have reared their head in various individuals that have played a part in the decline of racing over the last dozen years.

Plenty of good people who have done their best and contributed positively to racing have come and gone. But few of those have been the big decision-makers and administratively-speaking racing has a disastrous history under NZRB (New Zealand Racing Board) and now RITA (Racing Industry Transition Agency).

It’s the only conclusion you can reach when you look at the table below and see how far the decline has come in 12 years. The second line of the table shows that in 2008 the industry had net tangible equity of $104 million, which has declined to a deficit today of $40 million.

That was before last Tuesday week’s bail-out by Minister Peters who handed over $50 million to RITA so they could pay bills of $26 million and stop them from going into administration three days later. The balance of $24 million will, in part, need to be used by the clubs and codes just to ensure their survival while in idling-mode as racing comes back. How much will be left to reduce debt is unknown.

The TAB is fundamentally a good cash business that should be in good shape and servicing the racing industry well with maximum prizemoney levels while keeping its costs to a minimum

The TAB is fundamentally a good cash business that should be in good shape and servicing the racing industry well with maximum prizemoney levels while keeping its costs to a minimum, like any well-run business. But for a long time now, it has been servicing itself well on the pig’s back, and on a gradual basis, lessening the percentage returns to the codes for prizemoney distribution.

Why was it allowed to happen? Go back and read the first paragraph of this blog and you have your answer or answers. Politics played the most significant role followed by cronyism, and before long, we had racing run almost entirely by non-racing people. Having no skin in the racing game, these charlatans thought it was pretty cool, and it presented an excellent opportunity to bring some mates in and put them on big salaries.

The Racing Act of 2003  was supposed to protect the racing industry from these acts of human frailty, but nothing was ever policed, and the era of no accountability and no transparency commenced.

The Act said: 8. Objectives of Board The objectives of the Board are— (a) to promote the racing industry; and (b) to facilitate and promote racing betting and sports betting; and (c) to maximise its profits for the long-term benefit of New Zealand racing.  

9. Functions of Board (1) The functions of the Board are— (a) to develop policies that are conducive to the overall economic development of the racing industry, and the economic well-being of people who, and organisations which, derive their livelihoods from racing.

No piece of legislation was ever ignored more than those clauses, but no one ever contested NZRB’s actions or demanded accountability. Why?

	Now	2019 (4)	2017 (3)	2013 (2)	2008 (1)
Net Cash (DEBT)	($45m)	($25m)	$40m	$40m	$65
Net tangible equity	($40)	($20m)	$56m	$62m	$104m
Profit		$135m	$148m	$140m	$130m
Expenses		$211m	$200m	$173m	$141m
Salaries/wages		$61m	$59	$41m	$36m
Employees on $100k plus		136	136	93	38

Summary of the financial results of years of mismanagement of the TAB.
Key: 1. Nathan Guy takes over as Minister of Racing – NZRB
2. Nathan Guy is Minister for Racing, Glenda Highes (Chair) and John Allen CEO – NZRB
3. Winston Peters commences as Minister of Racing – NZRB and RITA
4. RITA is formed – Dean McKenzie appointed Chair and then Executive Chair

Have another look at that table and imagine an out-of-control gravy-train roaring down the tracks while the starving the coal-face of racing as it looks on in despair. Then, the new Minister Winston Peters arrived and engaged Messara to write the Messara Review and everyone thought Christmas had arrived early. Alas, it wasn’t Christmas, it was Armageddon Day and the nightmare was starting over again.

MAC was briefed to operationalise the Messara Review but decided it knew better and would fix things its own way. MAC became RITA (Racing Industry Transition Agency) and has since ignored the Minister’s Letter of Expectation and the needs of the racing industry as a whole.

Here’s what the first part of the legislation said, which became law last July: The objectives of the Agency are—(aa) to reform New Zealand racing in a manner that supports effective governance and improves industry sustainability; and (a) to promote the racing industry; and (b) to facilitate and promote racing betting and sports betting; and (c) to maximise its profits for the long-term benefit of New Zealand racing.

Please raise your hand if your think RITA has done its best to achieve the above. Please raise your hands if you think they have both carried out the terms of reference for MAC and Letter of Expectation from the Minister. I don’t see anyone raising their hand.

McKenzie was informed of the bail-out from going into administration only a day or two before it happened.

The second-hand hotline tells me that Executive Chair Dean McKenzie hardly ever gets to talk with Minister Peters, and that Minister Peters gave him a bollocking just before his announcement last Tuesday week. It also tells me that McKenzie was informed of the bail-out from going into administration only a day or two before it happened.

Whatever way you look at it, McKenzie and RITA has been a disaster. Sure, they received a hospital pass from NZRB, but the Agency knew what they were getting into well before that, but in horse parlance, have failed even to raise a remedial canter. RITA is the unqualified disaster for racing of 2020 but is using COVID-19 to stay afloat.

They cannot stay afloat for very long, however, because as already explained, the $50 million does not alter the long-term prognosis without any appetite for changing the structure, the people or the executive team that has already failed NZRB. Where is this industry heading in the next few months?

We know RITA is heading for a budget miss of $65 million or over

We know that the codes are all broke and the clubs mainly destitute, bar the Auckland Racing Club, and Riverton. We know RITA is heading for a budget miss of $65 million or over, and that the TAB won’t bring in very much profit even with the resumption of racing in July on a restricted calendar. And here we are on May 22nd and RITA is still holding back its Half-Year Report – not because it’s expected to be riveting reading.

We know that COVID-19 has been a blow, but the TAB was trading as insolvent before the virus took effect. We know that available prizemoney on 2019/20 assessments will be down 40 to 50 percent for the 2020/21 season on the expected result.

But we also know that by August-September, the TAB turnover will be significantly down as we go into recession caused by Covid-19. No one knows how detrimental it could be, but estimates from educated sources suggest perhaps only half of the previous year.

Then, as if we didn’t need any more bad news, the piroplasmosis detected in a mare about to be exported to Australia and has halted all thoroughbred exports across the Tasman, and left the industry isolated with an equine equivalent of COVID-19. The borders are closed which has left the immediate future of horse exports in the balance.

Price Waterhouse Cooper’s stated that RITA ‘has a very weak equity position.’

When the Minister made his speech last Tuesday week he admitted that Price Waterhouse Cooper’s stated that RITA ‘has a very weak equity position.’ He also said that they advised that RITA should be recapitalised and this work will proceed over the next three months.

The Minister further said, “we are calling upon the industry to deliver serious reform, and that is necessary for the Government to be confident that any future investment is well directed.”

What? What was the Minister expecting when no structural change to governance has taken place, and he is dealing with the same team of failed executives that built the already redundant Fixed Odds Betting platform? Why do we keep coming back to Einstein’s definition of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

As well, don’t forget the contribution TAB makes to the NZ tax base which is $100 million-plus a year (GST, betting, training fees, sale of horses, PAYE, Gaming duty), which more than offsets the $72.5 million donation made last week. Also, add the $10 million racing gets for sports annually which the government would need to front up with if racing wasn’t doing it for them.

That’s not to even mention compensation for the gross mismanagement of the TAB over the past 12 years by Government appointees who were nothing more than civil servants with zero qualifications.

Winston Peters: We have had enough of old men leaning against the rails scratching their derriere and blaming everyone else. Fortunately, common sense is prevailing.”

The Minister in his speech went on to say: “RITA and the codes have tightened their belts. Sadly, there has been some internal squabbling in racing circles. Some blame the transition agency for the problems it inherited. We have had enough of old men leaning against the rails scratching their derriere and blaming everyone else. Fortunately, common sense is prevailing.”

Well, sorry, Minister, but unfortunately, common sense is not prevailing because you have grossly missed all the points. The codes are now united but your RITA represents neither your brief nor the interests of the racing industry, and we can only presume they represent themselves.